PDA

View Full Version : listening to mike peierra on nfln about the rules


tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 08:52 AM
this guy is a total dbag. that is all.

Irish Stout
10-15-2009, 08:58 AM
this guy is a total dbag. that is all.

???

The Joker
10-15-2009, 09:01 AM
I quite enjoy 'Official Review', personally.

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 09:01 AM
go watch him try and explain some of these plays that are absolute BS. redskins guy gets destroyed on a fair punt call before he even gets the ball, but its a fumble? whereas houston texans guy muffs a fair catch return, but since the ball did not hit the ground its NOT a fumble yet. WTF?

The Joker
10-15-2009, 09:08 AM
go watch him try and explain some of these plays that are absolute BS. redskins guy gets destroyed on a fair punt call before he even gets the ball, but its a fumble? whereas houston texans guy muffs a fair catch return, but since the ball did not hit the ground its NOT a fumble yet. WTF?

What part exactly don't you get?

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 09:09 AM
What part exactly don't you get?

the fact that they are absolutely BS calls, and that is quite obvious.

cutthemdown
10-15-2009, 09:22 AM
the fact that they are absolutely BS calls, and that is quite obvious.

Here is why the muff wasn't a fumble. Once a fair catch signal made the opposing player not allowed to interfere in any way with him catching the ball. The players opportunity to catch the ball does not end until it hits the ground. You can't catch it off his bobble until the ball hits the ground and hit attempt at the fair catch has ended.

Why is this BS to you?It's just usually the ball doesn't get bobbled right into the defenders arms. But the rule is clear.

Kaylore
10-15-2009, 09:23 AM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 09:24 AM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

i guess lump me into this group then, not so much him defending the rules, but the rules themselves that are garbage.

Man-Goblin
10-15-2009, 09:25 AM
I still don't get the Redskins punt call. Seems to me like they're saying you can throw a blocker into the return man just to cause a fumble.

The Joker
10-15-2009, 09:25 AM
The Texans guy has a right to field the ball unobstructed on a fair catch.

By rule, the punt is only muffed as soon as it hits the ground. That's the key part. The returner is allowed to bobble it, as long as it doesn't touch the ground it's a legitimate fair catch.

The Titans player grabs the ball before it hits the ground, when theoretically the Texans guy could have still caught it and made a legitimate fair catch. Obviously, he wouldn't have, but that's not the point.

With the Redskins, it was all the fault of the blocker. He has to know where his teammate, the returner, is and make damn sure he doesn't get in the way.

He gets shoved into the returner, and the ball comes off his foot, making it a live ball just as it is any time a player on the return team touches the ball without calling a fair catch.

The Joker
10-15-2009, 09:27 AM
I still don't get the Redskins punt call. Seems to me like they're saying you can throw a blocker into the return man just to cause a fumble.

You're allowed try and get by and push back a guy if he's blocking you.

If he's standing in front of the returner, that's not your problem.

BroncoBuff
10-15-2009, 09:29 AM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

You're 99% right I think, especially comparing to other sports.

But Pereira does lean toward the apologist stance sometimes.

Kaylore
10-15-2009, 09:35 AM
You're allowed try and get by and push back a guy if he's blocking you.

If he's standing in front of the returner, that's not your problem.

Sort of, if he's not blocking you and just standing in front of the returner and you push him into the returner, it's a flag on the guy who pushed. You can only push the coverage guy if he's trying to block you and you overpower him into the return man. I like this because it gives incentive if you're a strong player.

cutthemdown
10-15-2009, 09:37 AM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

what happens is sometimes things occur that just look weird. You don't see it but maybe a couple times a decade where a fair catch bounces of the returner and goes right into the hands of a defender who gets called for interference. I did see that once before though a long time ago in a GB/Detroit game.

cutthemdown
10-15-2009, 09:39 AM
i guess lump me into this group then, not so much him defending the rules, but the rules themselves that are garbage.

You don't think a returner should have until ball hits ground to catch it? The defender takes that risk by edging so close to the returner.

Maybe they should just make people stay further away while a player making a fair catch. I feel sometime the defender so close it is hindering the offensive player.

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 09:40 AM
You don't think a returner should have until ball hits ground to catch it? The defender takes that risk by edging so close to the returner.

Maybe they should just make people stay further away while a player making a fair catch. I feel sometime the defender so close it is hindering the offensive player.

they should be allowed to have a chance to catch it. if they bobble it and someone else takes it, that should be a fair ball. just like a pass, if they bobble it and someone else grabs it mid air after they touched it thats an interception, but with punt returns it has to hit the ground to be a live ball?

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-15-2009, 11:35 AM
Rules?
We dont need no stinkin rules!!!!!!!!!!!!

chickennob2
10-15-2009, 11:47 AM
they should be allowed to have a chance to catch it. if they bobble it and someone else takes it, that should be a fair ball. just like a pass, if they bobble it and someone else grabs it mid air after they touched it thats an interception, but with punt returns it has to hit the ground to be a live ball?

Here's the difference: you can't fair catch a pass. It's hard to define a "bobble" when someone is catching a punt. If the rule were that the fair catch attempt ends as soon as the ball is touched by the returner, say it slips once in his hand, or say it bounces off his chest into his hands. In that case, the ball would be live as soon as it touches him, i.e. you can clobber the guy, completely undoing the idea behind the fair catch. This way, it doesn't matter if the catch is clean or not, all that matters is that he catches it before it hits the ground.

Rock Chalk
10-15-2009, 12:01 PM
I still don't get the Redskins punt call. Seems to me like they're saying you can throw a blocker into the return man just to cause a fumble.

You can and its why Special Teams coaches preach to return team blockers to stay away from the return man on fair catches.

That play happened because of poor coaching.

gunns
10-15-2009, 12:32 PM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

QFT, especially about the NBA.

I've called BS on many calls and then he clears it up. I'm amazed sometimes at how good the refs are on these obscure rules. In the Raider/SD game I thought for sure Murphy had that TD, for days and so did everyone else, until Mike was on and it cleared that up. I've seen him say when it was a bad call.

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 12:35 PM
the rule that you can cross the goal line and its a TD regardless of what happens the second after you cross, but if you catch it and have possession in the end zone and it hits the ground it is NOT a TD, thats a silly rule. theres no consistency in stuff like that.,

enjolras
10-15-2009, 12:37 PM
Props to all the folks on this thread who really know the rules.

My one gripe: I really wish the NFL would make the official rulebook available to the public right from their site. As far as I can tell, getting at the official rulebook is almost impossible.

boltaneer
10-15-2009, 01:02 PM
the rule that you can cross the goal line and its a TD regardless of what happens the second after you cross, but if you catch it and have possession in the end zone and it hits the ground it is NOT a TD, thats a silly rule. theres no consistency in stuff like that.,

I don't have a problem with this. The rules for completing a pass and catch are consistent whether it's in the end zone or in the regular field of play. It doesn't have anything to do with crossing the goal line with the football.

The difference between the two scenarios you listed is possession. When a runner crosses the plane of the goal line, he has already demonstrated possession so it should be irrelevant what happens after that. The receiver who catches the ball in the end zone needs to demonstrate possession and therefore needs to control the ball as he hits the ground.

missingnumber7
10-15-2009, 01:20 PM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

Have you been watching baseball lately...it would be an 8 hour docudrama about how poor that MLB umpiring is...and it isn't just balls and strikes.

Anyway...Mike has a crappy job, but does decent work. Its the rules committee made of coaches that make this game hard to officiate.

Taco John
10-15-2009, 01:23 PM
this guy is a total dbag. that is all.



Dude, if you're going to say something then say something.

R8R H8R
10-15-2009, 02:23 PM
the fact that they are absolutely BS calls, and that is quite obvious.


Well, as Kaylore and a few others have already mentioned, your arguement is against the rules, not Peierra. And for the record, Peierra doesn't necessarily make the rules, the rules committee does.

The rules committe is made up of mostly coaches, some NFL officials, and probably Peierra. So if the coaches don't like a rule, they certainly can exert their influence to change it.

I don't like some of these ST rules myself, but if the coaches don't either, then they should change them.

Bronco LB52
10-15-2009, 03:11 PM
I disagree. I like Mike for standing up there and owning up when a call is bad. You don't see baseball or especially the ridiculous NBA do that. They don't send head of officiating out there to face the music when things go south.

And the calls this week were correct and he explained why. People can hate the rules, but they're just calling the rules as they're written.

It would be a worthy segment if ESPN, FOX or an unaffiliated media outlet was asking Pereira the tough questions, but it's hard to give it much credence when the questions are filtered through the NFL. It's a total PR stunt.

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 03:19 PM
Well, as Kaylore and a few others have already mentioned, your arguement is against the rules, not Peierra. And for the record, Peierra doesn't necessarily make the rules, the rules committee does.

The rules committe is made up of mostly coaches, some NFL officials, and probably Peierra. So if the coaches don't like a rule, they certainly can exert their influence to change it.

I don't like some of these ST rules myself, but if the coaches don't either, then they should change them.

yea i said that above...the rules are stupid.

RhymesayersDU
10-15-2009, 03:41 PM
Did the show cover the ridiculous taunting call that was called on the Pats player last week?

Also, regarding the NBA: look, you guys won't see me defending the NBA's officials. No way. But with games nightly, I don't know how they'd be able to do something like this. Same goes for mlb, nhl, etc. The nfl's weekly format lends itself to being able to do something like this.

R8R H8R
10-15-2009, 04:45 PM
Did the show cover the ridiculous taunting call that was called on the Pats player last week?
Also, regarding the NBA: look, you guys won't see me defending the NBA's officials. No way. But with games nightly, I don't know how they'd be able to do something like this. Same goes for mlb, nhl, etc. The nfl's weekly format lends itself to being able to do something like this.

Yes, he explained it well. What happened was that the ref in the tv picture originally called a personal foul--helmet to helmet--but picked it up and called it off after conferring with other officials.

It was another ref that was out of the tv picture view, that called taunting. It was the right call, imo. However, what was not right was the fact that the head-ref did not explain clearly the fact that they picked-up the flag for the personal foul & went with the taunting foul; Peierra(sp?) admitted that.

But the bottom line was that the right call eventually prevailed.

atomicbloke
10-15-2009, 04:48 PM
Did the show cover the ridiculous taunting call that was called on the Pats player last week?



Nothing ridiculous about it. It was taunting. They had to call it.

atomicbloke
10-15-2009, 04:53 PM
Yes, he explained it well. What happened was that the ref in the tv picture originally called a personal foul--helmet to helmet--but picked it up and called it off after conferring with other officials.

It was another ref that was out of the tv picture view, that called taunting. It was the right call, imo. However, what was not right was the fact that the head-ref did not explain clearly the fact that they picked-up the flag for the personal foul & went with the taunting foul; Peierra(sp?) admitted that.

But the bottom line was that the right call eventually prevailed.

This.

Also, even if the official who incorrectly threw the flag for PI, wanted to call for taunting also, he couldn't throw another flag, since his was already thrown.

There were 2 flags. One was for a wrong call and was correctly picked up. One was a right call and hence enforced. This time there were 2 flags thrown by 2 different officials. But even if the 2nd official didnt throw a flag, the first official could still make the taunting call.

If an official sees 2 fouls on one play, he can only throw 1 flag right? And even if 1 of the 2 calls are wrong, the other one would still stand.

R8R H8R
10-15-2009, 05:03 PM
This.

Also, even if the official who incorrectly threw the flag for PI, wanted to call for taunting also, he couldn't throw another flag, since his was already thrown.

There were 2 flags. One was for a wrong call and was correctly picked up. One was a right call and hence enforced. This time there were 2 flags thrown by 2 different officials. But even if the 2nd official didnt throw a flag, the first official could still make the taunting call.

If an official sees 2 fouls on one play, he can only throw 1 flag right? And even if 1 of the 2 calls are wrong, the other one would still stand.


My understanding is that if there are two calls by one ref, the ref is to throw his hat on the 2nd call. I could be wrong on that, but I think that is true. And Eisen and Pierero actually joked about that very thing during the conversation.

RhymesayersDU
10-15-2009, 05:28 PM
Nothing ridiculous about it. It was taunting. They had to call it.

Agreed, but what I meant was the fact that the official threw the flag before the taunting even occurred. I didn't type it all out, which I should have. Anyways, that's what I meant.

Rock Chalk
10-15-2009, 05:32 PM
Agreed, but what I meant was the fact that the official threw the flag before the taunting even occurred. I didn't type it all out, which I should have. Anyways, that's what I meant.

Yes the covered it and the TV doesn't show everything that happened.

THe official everyone see's throw the flag was throwing it for a helmet-to-helmet hit. They picked up that flag, but the back judge threw the flag for taunting.

Mike Pereira also noted he DID think that it was a helmet-to-helmet hit on Brandon Marshall and should have been called regardless. Either way, net result = automatic first down and half the distance to the goal.

RhymesayersDU
10-15-2009, 07:54 PM
Ah, I see. Good stuff.

cutthemdown
10-15-2009, 08:37 PM
the rule that you can cross the goal line and its a TD regardless of what happens the second after you cross, but if you catch it and have possession in the end zone and it hits the ground it is NOT a TD, thats a silly rule. theres no consistency in stuff like that.,

No because a runner has control of ball before he crosses the goaline, TD. A WR does not have control until he finishes the recpetion, which includes maintaining control through hitting the ground. Its a good rule.

Rock Chalk
10-15-2009, 08:50 PM
the rule that you can cross the goal line and its a TD regardless of what happens the second after you cross, but if you catch it and have possession in the end zone and it hits the ground it is NOT a TD, thats a silly rule. theres no consistency in stuff like that.,

Man you are just really ****ing bad at understanding the rules of the game you profess to love. I mean really ****ing bad. Taco may not be able to spot talent but at least he UNDERSTANDS THE GAME.

Wes Mantooth
10-15-2009, 09:27 PM
Hating Pierra for the rules is like hating "Greek" for guys getting injured all the time. Pierra interprets the rules, he does not make them.

tsiguy96
10-15-2009, 09:43 PM
Man you are just really ****ing bad at understanding the rules of the game you profess to love. I mean really ****ing bad. Taco may not be able to spot talent but at least he UNDERSTANDS THE GAME.

you dont understand at all waht im talking about. earlier this year sanchez crossed the line with hte ball then fumbled IMMEDIATELY, but still a TD. other guys get full possession of the ball then hit the ground and its no good. i agree with teh latter, the former is messed up, if you cross the line and then fumble, you did not maintain possession of the ball...

i "profess" to love? really?